bug#1484: marked as done (23.0.60; Apropos output: <v> etc.?)

[Emacs bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 03 Dec 2008 16:57:15 -0500
with message-id <jwv8wqxvsfp.fsf-monnier+emacsbugreports@gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#1484: 23.0.60; Apropos output: <v> etc.?
has caused the Emacs bug report #1484,
regarding 23.0.60; Apropos output: <v> etc.?
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact don@donarmstrong.com
immediately.)


-- 
1484: http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1484
Emacs Bug Tracking System
Contact don@donarmstrong.com with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> 23.0.60; Apropos output: <v> etc.?
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:08:49 -0800
>
>
>
>
> M-x apropos now uses tags such as <v>, <f>, <p>, instead of Variable,
> Function, Plist. Is this a bug? I don't see anything in NEWS about it
> (searching for "apropos").
>  
> It's certainly more opaque (less clear) than using plain English
> words. And there is no explanation (e.g. legend) of this new
> convention in the Apropos output buffer. How will a user know what <p>
> means?
>  
>
> In GNU Emacs 23.0.60.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
>  of 2008-11-24 on LENNART-69DE564
> Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
> configured using `configure --with-gcc (3.4) --no-opt --cflags -Ic:/g/include
> -fno-crossjumping'
>  
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#1484: 23.0.60; Apropos output: <v> etc.?
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Wed, 03 Dec 2008 16:57:15 -0500
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux)
>
>
>
>
> > M-x apropos now uses tags such as <v>, <f>, <p>, instead of Variable,
> > Function, Plist. Is this a bug? I don't see anything in NEWS about it
> > (searching for "apropos").
>
> Indeed, this is odd: the short form is now used in the default layout,
> whereas the long form is now used in the compact layout.  It should be
> the other way around.
> The pach below should fix it.  Thanks.
>  
>
>         Stefan
>
>
> === modified file 'lisp/apropos.el'
> --- lisp/apropos.el     2008-08-31 00:41:24 +0000
> +++ lisp/apropos.el     2008-12-03 21:52:25 +0000
> @@ -1096,8 +1096,8 @@
>          'face 'default 'apropos-symbol (car apropos-item))
>        (insert-text-button
>         (if apropos-compact-layout
> -           (button-type-get type 'apropos-label)
> -         (format "<%s>" (button-type-get type 'apropos-short-label)))
> +           (format "<%s>" (button-type-get type 'apropos-short-label))
> +         (button-type-get type 'apropos-label))
>         'type type
>         ;; Can't use the default button face, since user may have changed the
>         ;; variable!  Just say `no' to variables containing faces!
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---